Press reports today indicate that the 3 member committee has selected IC Satyanand Mishra as next CIC. He is a very learned and scholarly person. As former Secy DoPT he had strongly opposed file notings being disclosed in RTI. He had also opposed sitting of CIC other than as a full bench.
Let us all hope that he takes bold steps to uphold the courage of his convictions by implementing them.
Sarbajit
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:05 PM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
We can influence the case of appointment of right person as ICs and CCIC. The example of Mr P J Thomas is before us when the govt selected him despite the objectond from the Leader of the Opposition Mrs. Sushma Swaraj, leading Advocate Mr. Prashant Bhushan challenged that by filing a PIL and the result is before us. So, if the govt is not goving to appoint a suitable person, will should not keep quite. Due to shortage of 4 ICs at CIC, the pendency is increasing very fast.I am soon going to file an RTI appln before theDoPT to know the status in the matter of filling the remaining posts some of which r pending for long.I appeal to the other members to take initiative in the matter refraining from unrelated long discussion.On the cost of dipleasue of a member, I am of the opnion that if from the existing ICs, some one is to be appoiinted as CCIC, he should be Mr Shailesh Gandhi, a non-buracrat. I have formed this opinion because of an RTI reply on the impositon of number of penalties to an RTI applicant, Mr. Rakesh Gupta of Delhi. Reply of RTI in a tabulation form has been given below:CIC - SHAILESH GANDHI LEADS IN IMPOSING PENALTY WHILE OMITA PAL AND SUSHMA SINGH IMPOSED NO PENALTY.
[Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Delhi Based RTI Volunteer received the following information from the CIC on he imposition of penalty].
Figures mentioned herein speaks themselves.
(Pertains from the very start till 31st August, 2010).
S. No.
(1)
Commissioner
(Mr/Ms.)
(2)
No. of cases wherein penalty was imposed
(3)
In %
(4)
1.
Shailesh Gandhi
172
42.16
2.
Wajahat Habibullah*
104
25.49
3.
O P Kejriwal*
47
11.52
4.
A. N. Tiwari
38
9.31
5.
Annapurna Dixit
17
4.17
6.
Prof. M.M. Ansari*
11
2.7
7.
Padma Balasubramanian*
09
2.21
8.
Deepak Sandhu
06
1.47
9.
Satyananda Mishri
03
0.74
10.
M L Sharma
01
0.25
11.
Omita Pal*
00
00.00
12.
Sushma Singh
00
00.00
* Retired/ transferred to other Departments.
Per centage mentioned in column 4 is in respect of total cases heard.
Opinions of other members on my proposal are solicited.Sent: Mon, 13 December, 2010 9:12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: RTI challenges
You are absolutely correct. Free speech has its limits. Consensus is
difficult to achieve in large groups where everyone is allowed to
speak simultaneously. It is like the Indian Parliament which is a
total waste of time and money (Rs. 160 crores for 6.83 hours of work).
I have been advising the owners of this group to be more firm, but
they don't listen
very much to me any more.
When selection of ICs and CICs is not in our hands, why should we
waste our time and effort on discussing the process. What we can do
instead is expose their misdeeds and harmipan when they are in and out
of office with UNCHALLENGEABLE facts and arguments.
Why has nobody here criticised the acts and misdeeds of the present
C'IC and his Commission. I'm not speaking of the routine cribbing
about individual decisions, but
about the wholesale THEFT of RTI by those F****ers at CIC.
Watch out for my 2nd RTI challenge and participate
Sarbajit
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:50 PM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Sarab ji,
> Why do v continue to fight over an issue not related to RTI and moderators
> should refrain from putting such issues on the blog.
> I want to concentrate on filling the vacant posts of ICs at CIC and on our
> reaction on the proposed amendment.
>
> It is not prudent on our part to waste our energy on such issues on which
> consensus is difficult to be formed. The argument who came first, egg or
> hen can continue pertetually.
>
> I exhort to use your wide knowledge and experience on the main issue. I m
> with you, will all the members.
>
> I m not that type of person who will continue to ill-argue and will not
> apologize. If from my apology, this unproductive debate can be put to an
> end, I can apologize thousand times even though I have not made any
> mistake.
>
> Come on and let us discuss RTI related issues on an RTI blog.
>
> Religious issues can be discussed on some related blog.
>
> Your brotherly,
> M K Gupta
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.